Mike did NOT "waste a pick" in bringing in Cousins - EXCEPT in the minds of those that did not know better
this FO has shown that they know which players have a good chance of being a good fit here

I agree that a player should be given as much "time" as needed to "heal" - but that "time" is not the same as it used to be ..
IF the Dr and Mike think that RG3's knee is ready to take a hit and he is the best QB available - why does he need more time to "heal"?

I'm not in favor of "risking" anything - I just do not understand why "any extra time to heal" - HAS TO BE a "good thing" - doesn't Dr Andrews know how much time is needed? there's always a risk in taking a "big hit" in football - IF the Dr and Mike think the knee is ready and able to take a "big hit" - what's the issue? - who here knows better?

Nobody really expects the Redskins to do well - 8 wins is considered a winning season for Dan Snyder's Redskins Redskins should fire Bruce Allen & try a different way of managing this franchise

You know why I put the wasted pick reference in quotes, right? As far as giving someone extra time to heal being a good thing just read what I wrote a little more carefully.

I'm curious - Do you think either Mike or Dr. Andrews made an improper judgment concerning Griff's readiness to play during the Seattle game? Also, do you think there is any additional pressure to make a better judgment this time around?

DarthMonk wrote:I'll chalk this up to sarcasm. I might as well point by point it.

1 Whether anybody recognizes Mike as top dog or not is beside the point. I said he would have bolstered his position as top dog. Can that really be denied? As an aside, I just heard Sonny Jurgensen on the radio say "Who's the boss here?"

- I have no idea what Sonny is talking about on this. Or you. Shannahan is the boss of the team. No, it won't change anything.

From someone whose posts generally make him seem pretty intelligent and well informed, your "I have no idea..." is not credible. Sonny is not the only person asking this question. Heck, THN has threads about it. The scenario I put out would answer that question for the people asking it thereby bolstering Mike's position as Top Dog.

"Who" questions his being top dog is not an argument, and stating it would bolster his position as top dog begs the question since I'm saying I see no indication he is not, you're in your statement assuming he is not. Snyder seems to be not overruling him since we're not seeing butt stupid decisions. Allen seems like a good exec who is bringing in good players and helping manage the cap effectively even with the big hit we took. What actual ... evidence ... do you have that Shannahan is not the top dog?

And if he's not now, then I do not agree at all that starting Cousins would make him so.

DarthMonk wrote:3 I never said Mike is interested in the genius label though he may be. Again, That is beside the point. If my scenario were to play out Mike would be lauded as a wise man.

- Why would he be lauded as wise when he played his backup because his starter was injured? If you mean for drafting Cousins, I think he's already got that credit.

Why would he be lauded as wise? you ask ... For going 3-1 with the QB he "wasted a pick on" while giving his franchise QB 5 extra weeks to heal before devastating the Cowgirls on national TV in his 2013 debut.

You don't contradict what I said.

DarthMonk wrote:4 This one is too easy. I simply said Mike would have given Griff five more weeks to heal. That is what we call arithmetic.

- I thought you said you weren't doing it unless Griff wasn't ready? So how is this a credit to anyone? Though factually yes, it is five more weeks to heal, but I don't draw a conclusion from that.

Huh??? The 4th OUTCOME of my scenario is the extra five weeks of healing. Very simple. Football, this thread, and contrived examples aside, I'd say giving a person extra time to heal is an intrinsically good thing.

This doesn't contradict what I said.

Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

1 I didn't try to make an argument with a "who." The fact that ANYONE asks "Who's the boss?" (and many do) means Mike's status as Top Dog is not unquestioned and my scenario would make fewer people question that status thus bolstering that status. THAT is the argument. It may not change anything in your mind but it would certainly change things in the minds of many others. If Mike made a decision to not start Griff, especially if medically cleared, there would instantly be comments everywhere mentioning things like "I guess we know who's in charge now." I wouldn't expect such a comment from you but you don't seriously doubt that would happen elsewhere, do you?

2 Was not trying to contradict. I answered your question: "Why would he be lauded as wise?" Are you seriously trying to argue that if my scenario played out there wouldn't be any talk in the media or on this board that Make had done a wise thing?

My answer to your question is clear.

3 Again, no contradiction attempted. I answered your "I thought you said you weren't doing it unless Griff wasn't ready?" with "Huh???" since I did not understand your meaning then stated that my original post described an outcome following a scenario rather than something from which we would draw secondary or tertiary conclusions.

1 I didn't try to make an argument with a "who." The fact that ANYONE asks "Who's the boss?" (and many do) means Mike's status as Top Dog is not unquestioned and my scenario would make fewer people question that status thus bolstering that status. THAT is the argument. It may not change anything in your mind but it would certainly change things in the minds of many others. If Mike made a decision to not start Griff, especially if medically cleared, there would instantly be comments everywhere mentioning things like "I guess we know who's in charge now." I wouldn't expect such a comment from you but you don't seriously doubt that would happen elsewhere, do you?

2 Was not trying to contradict. I answered your question: "Why would he be lauded as wise?" Are you seriously trying to argue that if my scenario played out there wouldn't be any talk in the media or on this board that Make had done a wise thing?

My answer to your question is clear.

3 Again, no contradiction attempted. I answered your "I thought you said you weren't doing it unless Griff wasn't ready?" with "Huh???" since I did not understand your meaning then stated that my original post described an outcome following a scenario rather than something from which we would draw secondary or tertiary conclusions.

Straw men or misunderstandings (or both) abound.

It seems like we're boiling down on all the points to either minor or no disagreement.

Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

1 I didn't try to make an argument with a "who." The fact that ANYONE asks "Who's the boss?" (and many do) means Mike's status as Top Dog is not unquestioned and my scenario would make fewer people question that status thus bolstering that status. THAT is the argument. It may not change anything in your mind but it would certainly change things in the minds of many others. If Mike made a decision to not start Griff, especially if medically cleared, there would instantly be comments everywhere mentioning things like "I guess we know who's in charge now." I wouldn't expect such a comment from you but you don't seriously doubt that would happen elsewhere, do you?

2 Was not trying to contradict. I answered your question: "Why would he be lauded as wise?" Are you seriously trying to argue that if my scenario played out there wouldn't be any talk in the media or on this board that Make had done a wise thing?

My answer to your question is clear.

3 Again, no contradiction attempted. I answered your "I thought you said you weren't doing it unless Griff wasn't ready?" with "Huh???" since I did not understand your meaning then stated that my original post described an outcome following a scenario rather than something from which we would draw secondary or tertiary conclusions.

Straw men or misunderstandings (or both) abound.

It seems like we're boiling down on all the points to either minor or no disagreement.

Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

1 I didn't try to make an argument with a "who." The fact that ANYONE asks "Who's the boss?" (and many do) means Mike's status as Top Dog is not unquestioned and my scenario would make fewer people question that status thus bolstering that status. THAT is the argument. It may not change anything in your mind but it would certainly change things in the minds of many others. If Mike made a decision to not start Griff, especially if medically cleared, there would instantly be comments everywhere mentioning things like "I guess we know who's in charge now." I wouldn't expect such a comment from you but you don't seriously doubt that would happen elsewhere, do you?

2 Was not trying to contradict. I answered your question: "Why would he be lauded as wise?" Are you seriously trying to argue that if my scenario played out there wouldn't be any talk in the media or on this board that Make had done a wise thing?

My answer to your question is clear.

3 Again, no contradiction attempted. I answered your "I thought you said you weren't doing it unless Griff wasn't ready?" with "Huh???" since I did not understand your meaning then stated that my original post described an outcome following a scenario rather than something from which we would draw secondary or tertiary conclusions.

Straw men or misunderstandings (or both) abound.

It seems like we're boiling down on all the points to either minor or no disagreement.

Yeah ... I was thinking people might reply with other outcomes like "What if Cousins sucked against the Eagles?" and stuff like that. A few did. Deadman pointed out the old QB controversy angle. I think it was riggofan who brought up the possibility of Cousins going 1-3.

1 I didn't try to make an argument with a "who." The fact that ANYONE asks "Who's the boss?" (and many do) means Mike's status as Top Dog is not unquestioned and my scenario would make fewer people question that status thus bolstering that status. THAT is the argument. It may not change anything in your mind but it would certainly change things in the minds of many others. If Mike made a decision to not start Griff, especially if medically cleared, there would instantly be comments everywhere mentioning things like "I guess we know who's in charge now." I wouldn't expect such a comment from you but you don't seriously doubt that would happen elsewhere, do you?

2 Was not trying to contradict. I answered your question: "Why would he be lauded as wise?" Are you seriously trying to argue that if my scenario played out there wouldn't be any talk in the media or on this board that Make had done a wise thing?

My answer to your question is clear.

3 Again, no contradiction attempted. I answered your "I thought you said you weren't doing it unless Griff wasn't ready?" with "Huh???" since I did not understand your meaning then stated that my original post described an outcome following a scenario rather than something from which we would draw secondary or tertiary conclusions.

Straw men or misunderstandings (or both) abound.

It seems like we're boiling down on all the points to either minor or no disagreement.

Yeah ... I was thinking people might reply with other outcomes like "What if Cousins sucked against the Eagles?" and stuff like that. A few did. Deadman pointed out the old QB controversy angle. I think it was riggofan who brought up the possibility of Cousins going 1-3.

I don't see a downside for playing him. If he's not great then we still should get a second or third rounder at some point. To do better, he's going to have to actually play well. The majority of these trades for other team's little tested young backups have gone mediocre to poor and teams are going to be hesitant without seeing more than they did.

Still, I don't see any reason to play him unless Griff really can't go or trade him unless we get an offer we're not going to get at this time. We actually do need a backup. I like having Rex sitting on the bench, but I want him to stay on the bench...

Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

DarthMonk wrote:I am not advocating we wait until after the bye to start Griff but over the off season it occasionally surfaced as a possible timetable. Anyway, I was thinking about the possibility and, if it actually happened, what the outcomes could be. Here are a few I came up with.

Imagine Cousins going 3-1 with a win vs. the Eags, a tough loss at Green Bay, a win vs. the Lions, and a win at Oakland. Further imagine a 4 game stat line of 1,000 yards, 68.8% completion rate (his stat last year, #2 in NFL), 8 TDs, 2 picks, and a 101.6 QB rating (his stat last year, #5 in NFL behind Griff).

Now imagine the Dallas game during bye week. It's Griff's 1st start and we are going to Dallas. Instead of them laying in wait to avenge Turkey Day, we are breathing fire in anticipation of Griff's debut. Then Griff lights 'em up in "Griff's House" just like last year.

1 Mike would certainly have bolstered his position as Top Dog.

2 Mike would have showcased Cousins giving the league 4 more chances to see him and essentially cementing his status as a guy well worth trading for.

3 Mike's status as a genius goes through the roof. He has gotten the whole city and the team extra rabid for this game and the Griffskins have slain them. Cousins is even more valuable and pretty darn happy. We are pumped and off to the races.

4 Oh, here's a good one - Mike would have given Griff 5 extra weeks to "heal."

SkinsJock wrote:I think this sums it up ... "the idea that Griffin would, or should, sit until the bye week a month into the season isn't grounded in reality"

I don't know much about this game but I do know that when you have a "weapon" like this kid and there is ZERO reason not to use it - you play him

Yeah I'm pretty sure that was Shanahan's thinking last December. lol.

And don't get your panties all twisted up. I pretty much agree with what you're saying. Although I am kind of laughing that you're breaking out Jason LaCanfora to back up your point. That dude has less credibility around here than Skip Bayless!

^^ - good point I cannot stand that idiot LaCanfora (or Bayless) either ...

I'm not sure what Mike was thinking the last few games - I am sure that he knows that he (and others) made some really stupid decisions and he's learned a lot from all that ..
IMHO as soon as Mike knew there was a good chance RG3 would be able to play, he started muddying the water - Mike is as devious as they come & will try anything to get an edge

I think, most of us are on the same page here - Mike will have RG3 at QB ONLY when he is sure that the knee can take a hit

my 'issue' about possibly holding him out is that I feel, granted, nobody knows for sure, that the knee is a lot 'better' than most realize because of the use of stem cells + the incredible athlete that is RG3 ...

I understand that some think that he needs more time - no worries - I agree, we'd possibly be OK with Cousins ..

BECAUSE the Dr, Mike (and RG3) are not worried about the knee taking a hit, he should be playing ...
we're a better offense with RG3 and I do not think that he's risking anything by playing - any more than playing in the NFL, that is

Nobody really expects the Redskins to do well - 8 wins is considered a winning season for Dan Snyder's Redskins Redskins should fire Bruce Allen & try a different way of managing this franchise

SkinsJock wrote:^^ - good point I cannot stand that idiot LaCanfora (or Bayless) either ...

I'm not sure what Mike was thinking the last few games - I am sure that he knows that he (and others) made some really stupid decisions and he's learned a lot from all that ..

I'll just say personally I can't blame Coach on that one, even if it turned out to be the wrong decision in hindsight.

I'm sure you remember a lot of debate on here last December during those last few games when RGIII was just gimpy. Should he play him or not. I'll fully admit I was one of the guys saying, "You gotta play your best players." A lot of folks on here were saying, "Bench him, protect your franchise QB for the future."

I just know from my own coaching experience, I have definitely stuck with my more talented "injured" players in big games over healthier kids. It can be really difficult to be thinking long term, big picture at times when you have a chance to win NOW.

I agree with that - everyone involved, Mike, Kyle, Dr Andrews and RG3 were all not being really honest with each other and all were wanting to believe what they were being 'told', while not believing what they (and we) were 'seeing'

I really believe that all those involved, really learned from what happened and they are all (and we the fans too) are incredibly fortunate that Dr Andrews was able to do what he did ..

anything can happen in this game but I think that this kid will be an even better QB than he was last season - he will definitely be a better leader and better team player than he was

Nobody really expects the Redskins to do well - 8 wins is considered a winning season for Dan Snyder's Redskins Redskins should fire Bruce Allen & try a different way of managing this franchise